Conservatives rally against President Barack Obama's Affordable Care Act on Thursday outside the U.S. Supreme Court. The court upheld the law as constitutional under the government's right to levy taxes.

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama bet his first term on health care and won a huge vindication Thursday at the Supreme Court. But legal victory, however stunning, won’t ensure political survival for Obama or his signature achievement.

Both hang in the balance in November’s election, and the impact of Thursday’s ruling, with more than four months remaining in the campaign, may be a muddle.

The high court deflated the loudest complaints about the legitimacy of the health care law, giving Obama the opening to campaign on it as a clear achievement. But the ruling also drives conservatives long leery of Mitt Romney more firmly into his arms and energizes Obama’s critics.

“Our mission is clear. If we want to replace Obamacare, we’re going to have to replace President Obama,” Romney said after the ruling came down. “What the court did today was say that Obamacare does not violate the Constitution. What they did not do was say that Obamacare is good law or that it’s good policy.”

Obama’s task is to overcome skepticism about the law’s benefits, especially among independent voters who could tip the election, and he quickly set to work doing so.

“I know the debate over this law has been divisive,” Obama said from the White House, speaking moments after his GOP rival. “Whatever the politics, today’s decision was a victory for people all over this country whose lives will be more secure because of this law and the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold it.”

‘Red flag to a bull’

And while the decision ensures that health care will be a top issue in the campaign, the precarious economy and sluggish job creation are still dominant for voters. Fiscal storms brewing in Europe also could do more to determine the outcome of the Obama-Romney battle.

Texas congressman Michael Burgess, a physician who is a leading voice on health care for House conservatives, called the ruling “a pretty big disappointment.” But with the Supreme Court authoritatively labeling Obama’s mandate a new tax, he saw more than a glimmer of political upside because tea party advocates will be even more fired up.

“They may have a harder time with this victory than they anticipated,” said Burgess, R-Lewisville. “This is inflammatory to the base. That is a red flag to a bull. … Far from being disheartened, I suspect people are in fact more engaged today than they were yesterday.”

He also noted that in the majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts emphasized that the court avoids second-guessing elected leaders on matters of policy. “It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices,” he wrote.

Burgess took that as a call to action in November. “If anything, he’s telling people they need to pay attention to their political choices,” he said.

For two years, “Obamacare” has been a punching bag for Republicans, and Thursday’s ruling only encouraged them to hunker down and focus on fulfilling their “repeal and replace” mantra. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor of Virginia scheduled a July 11 vote to repeal the law. But with a Democratic Senate, and Obama still wielding the veto pen, that will be entirely symbolic.

The public has been evenly divided on the GOP promise to repeal the law. Poll after poll shows voters don’t much care for the package the Supreme Court validated Thursday, particularly the individual mandate element. But many of its components are extremely popular: requiring insurers to keep children up to age 26 on a parent’s policy and barring insurers from turning away those with a pre-existing condition or charging more for women.

The White House and its allies spent much of the day after the ruling highlighting those benefits, and it’s a good bet the reminders will persist throughout the summer and fall.

And it’s clear, at least for now, that the combatants want to engage on the issue. Obama went out of his way to take a potshot at his opponent, noting that as Massachusetts governor, Romney advocated for just the sort of individual insurance mandate he now denounces, and which the court just upheld.

Raising the stakes

The Romney camp boasted by mid-afternoon that it had raised $2 million from tens of thousands of donors who wanted to send a pro-repeal message.

“This decision clearly raises the stakes in November. The choice has never been more clear,” said Rep. Joe Barton, R-Arlington.

Texas Sen. John Cornyn faces higher stakes, too. He leads the GOP’s Senate campaign effort, and a President Romney would need a Republican-controlled Senate to back repeal.

“The Supreme Court made clear today that the American people will be the ultimate judge of Obamacare,” Cornyn said.

But the playing field will change. The Supreme Court’s ruling is sure to sway perceptions of the law, helping the president.

“In terms of the world of validators, having the Supreme Court say this is constitutional is a pretty good thing,” said Patrick Griffin, an American University professor who fought the Clinton-era health care battles as the White House liaison to Congress. “The Republicans have been unrelenting in challenging the value of this. … All of that went out the window.”

But he sees plenty of work ahead for Obama, who has only a brief window to reframe the conversation and begin selling the policy more effectively than he’s managed to do in the last three years.

“They’ve convinced themselves it was the right thing. They haven’t been as effective at making that case broadly,” Griffin said.

Democrats quickly sought to harness the win into legislative momentum. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada called on Republicans to go with the flow.

“Our Supreme Court has spoken,” he said. “The matter is settled.”

Republicans insisted that the fight has only just begun. Americans for Prosperity, one of the biggest players among conservative groups that spread money around independent of the party, launched a $9 million, 12-state ad blitz late Wednesday on the matter.

The ads seek to make Obama a synonym for “mandate,” and to emphasize that his signature law is a massive new tax.

But there’s some chance, analysts said, that the issue could wane in importance, with the economy still weighing so heavily.

“Is there any other issue that’s been so thoroughly litigated in the court of public opinion?” said independent handicapper Charlie Cook. “It’s sort of factored into the stock price for and against President Obama.”

To post a comment, log into your chosen social network and then add your comment below. Your comments are subject to our Terms of Service and the privacy policy and terms of service of your social network. If you do not want to comment with a social network, please consider writing a letter to the editor.